Multi-Platform-Inclusive IT Optimization Assessment ...€¦ · Multi-Platform-Inclusive IT...

Multi-Platform -Inclusive IT Optimization Assessment Methodology

Monte BaumanIBM Columbus

[email protected]

Friday, March 16, 2012: 09:30AM - 10:30AM, OMNI HazelnutSession Number 10491

Topics Atlanta2012

Topics

1. Abstract2. Multi-Platform-Inclusive IT Optimization Assessment

Methodology Overview3. Architectural Analysis4. Requirements Analysis5. Cost Analysis6. Case Study7. Case Study - Architectural Analysis8. Case Study - Requirements Analysis9. Case Study - Cost Analysis10.Conclusion

Topics Atlanta2012

Abstract

Topics Atlanta2012

Abstract

• It is great having choices. Choices are the harvest of competition, driving innovation and price/performance (and we all want that!).

• But making choices in the vast - complex - fast moving technology and business space that is "IT" is difficult and inefficient and all too often ineffective. The results of ill-made choices can have long lasting dire effects including failed projects, blown budgets, delayed timelines, and worse (i.e. careers veering off course).

• In this presentation, our speaker will suggest an approach for making IT decisions that is architectural-based, requirements-oriented, and platform-inclusive. Our speaker's suggested approach has three parts:

• (1) A suggested taxonomy for depicting (i.e. drawing) an application architecture including its code (and data components), the containers (where the code runs), the connectors (communications between containers), and platforms (hardware and hypervisors) ... cognizant of application tiers AND application development lifecycle stages

• (2) A "local-factors"-based requirements analysis of leading architectural options (derived in step (1)) resulting in a requirements scorecard providing a relativistic rating of the architected options. Requirements are solicited from the varied and multiple viewpoints of a project (architects, developers, engineers, operations, etc. ... these "local people" provide the facts and information that are the "local factors").

• (3) A "TCO"-based analysis, creating a technically-sound and requirements-equitable cost of ownership scorecard for the top-rated architecture options (derived from step (2)).

• The result of the approach is the derivation of decision-making artifacts including understandable architectural diagrams, a requirements scorecard, and a cost scorecard, wherein the information required to assess the "best fit" (the best "choice") is brought together in an "inclusive" manner (inclusive of all viable architectural elements, AND inclusive of all local-factor-based requirements).

Topics Atlanta2012

End of Section

Topics Atlanta2012

Multi-Platform -Inclusive IT Optimization Assessment Methodology Overview

Topics Atlanta2012

Platform Placement IT Optimization Challenges

• (Platform Placement) Choices are great to have…• Robust server marketplace

• x86• System z• POWER• SPARC• etc.

• Emerging “Cloud” marketplace• Private (see above)• Public

• Middleware everywhere (portable containers)• Choices are (u-pick) … hard fun time-consuming painful!

Platform Placement

Mistakes are Expensive

Topics Atlanta2012

New Server Form Factors

• Pre-Integrated Servers • Heterogeneous Servers• Enclosed Clusters• Single System Images• Robust Hypervisors• Appliances

• Examples:• zEnterprise • Cisco UCS• More coming

Aix

Windows

Linux

z/OS

VSE

TPF

x86

POWER

z

IBM i

SPARC

Netezza

IDAA

Azul

DataPower

UCS

zEnterprise

Topics Atlanta2012

Server

Building a SystemThen…

Hardware

Operating System

Middleware

Application

NetworkNetwork Storage

Systems Management

Server

Hardware

Operating System

Middleware

Application


Systems Management

Server

Hardware

Operating System

Middleware

Application


Systems Management

Server

Hardware

Operating System

Middleware

Application


Systems Management

Server

Hardware

Operating System

Middleware

Application


Systems Management

Server

Hardware

Operating System

Middleware

Application


Systems Management

Topics Atlanta2012

Singe System Image (Systems Management)

Enclosed Cluster (Network)

Building a SystemNow…

Hardware

Hypervisor

Operating System

Middleware

Application

Hardware

Application

Operating System

Middleware

Application


Systems Management

Topics Atlanta2012

Evaluating a System

Build the System

Operatethe

System

Maintainand

Enhance the

System

Retire the System

Time(the

project plan)

Risk(acceptable risk plan)

Capability(functionality)

Cost(the

project budget)

Topics Atlanta2012

IT Optimization Assessment MethodologyOverview

Architecture Analysis

Requirements Analysis

TCO Analysis

Topics Atlanta2012

IT Optimization Assessment MethodologyFactors



Cost Analysis

Options

Local Factors

Cost Factors

Topics Atlanta2012

IT Optimization Assessment MethodologyIBM Offerings / Workshops



Cost Analysis

Options

Local Factors

Cost Factors

IAW

Right-Fit

RACE Eagle

Fit for Purpose

Scorpion

Topics Atlanta2012

IT Optimization Assessment MethodologyExample


Architectural Analysis

Project

TCO Analysis

Candidate Solutions

Solutions Sorted by Requirements-Fit

Optimized Project

Requirements

Local Factors

Products

Technology

Code/Data

Containers

Connectors

Platforms

Capacity Plan

Configurations

Costs

Topics Atlanta2012

End of Section

Topics Atlanta2012


Topics Atlanta2012



Project

Candidate Solutions

Code/Data

Containers

Connectors

Platforms

It’s About the Options!Being “Platform Inclusive”

Topics Atlanta2012

IT Solution CompositionComponents

• Components• Code• Data • Rules/Scripts/Config Files/etc.

Code

Code

Data

What languages “can” be used?

What languages “must” be

used?

What data structures “can” be used?

What data structures “must” be

used?

Topics Atlanta2012

Container

Container

Container

IT Solution CompositionContainers


• Containers• Operating Systems• Middleware• Processes/Address Spaces• The “API” Provider• etc.

Code

Code

Data

What containers “can” be used?

What containers “must” be

used?

Topics Atlanta2012

Container

Container

Container

IT Solution CompositionConnections



• Connections• TCP/IP RPC• TCP/IP DRDA• TCP/IP MQ• TCP/IP IEDN RPC• etc.

Code

Code

Connector

Data

Connector

What connectors

“can” be used?

What connectors “must” be

used?

Topics Atlanta2012

Platform

Platform

Platform

Container

Container

Container

IT Services CompositionPlatform



• Connections• TCP/IP RPC• TCP/IP DRDA• TCP/IP MQ• etc.

• Platform• Discrete Server

• and Operating System• Virtual Machine

• and Operating System• and Hosting Server / Hypervisor

Code

Code

Connector

Data

Connector

What platforms “can” be used?

What platforms “must” be

used?

Topics Atlanta2012

Option 1

Architectural Options



• Connections• TCP/IP RPC• TCP/IP DRDA• TCP/IP MQ• etc.

• Platform• Discrete Server

• and Operating System• Virtual Machine

• and Operating System• and Hosting Server / Hypervisor

Platform

Platform

Platform

Container

Container

Container

Code

Code

Connector

Data

Connector

Option 2

Platform

Platform

Platform

Container

Container

Container

Code

Code

Connector

Data

Connector

Topics Atlanta2012

Server/Image 3Database Layer

Server Utilization

Server/Image 1Presentation LayerServer Utilization

Server/Image 2

Topology Variable Overhead

Application LayerServer Utilization

ApplicationProcessingUtilization



Connectors Matter!

Topics Atlanta2012


Server Utilization


Server/Image 2

Topology Variable Overhead - Components

TCP/IPNetwork

ProcessingUtilization

DataSerializationProcessingUtilization


TCP/IPNetwork


TCP/IPNetwork




TCP/IPNetwork



Data/NetSecurity


Data/NetSecurity


Data/NetSecurity


Data/NetSecurity





Added Capacity

Adds Cost

All this processing is added by the topology

And Then There’s

The Response

Time Budget

Topics Atlanta2012


Server Utilization


Topology Variable Overhead – Tier Consolidation

TCP/IPNetwork




TCP/IPNetwork



Data/NetSecurity


Data/NetSecurity





A topology using co-location reduces

processing

And Then There’s The Response

Time Budget

Topics Atlanta2012

Architecture Analysis - Options

• Define the option:• Components• Containers• Connectors• Platforms• Lifecycle Support (dev/test/qa/prod environments)

• Limit the options analysis to those that are truly viable• Based upon your “patterns”• Based upon your “edge” ( leading / bleeding / trailing )• Boiling the ocean is not very productive

• Document the Architectural Options (Architectural Artif acts)

Option 1

Platform

Platform

Platform

Container

Container

Container

Code

Code

Connector

Data

Connector

Option 2

Platform

Platform

Platform

Container

Container

Container

Code

Code

Connector

Data

Connector

IAW Right-Fit

Topics Atlanta2012

End of Section

Topics Atlanta2012


Topics Atlanta2012



Candidate Solutions


Requirements

Local Factors

Products

Technology

Topics Atlanta2012

Requirements(examples)

• Perform a function (capability )• Deliver the function on time• Perform that function where needed • Perform that function when needed

• planned up time (and planned down time)• unplanned down time (availability )

• Perform that function how needed• in a manner the user finds productive (ease of use)• in a manner the user finds productive (response time )• For all the users using the system (throughput )

• Make changes to the function over time• Protect the function from illicit or illegal access or use (security )• Provide ROI (deliver on budget )

Time

Risk

Capability

Cost

Topics Atlanta2012

Development

Solution Viewpoints1. Build Components

Code

Code

Data

Developer

BusinessApplication

Owner

BusinessAnalyst

(Modeler)

Topics Atlanta2012

Development

Solution Viewpoints2. Build Containers and Connectors

Code

Container

Code

Container

Connector

Data

Container

Connector

Developer

BusinessApplication

Owner

ApplicationArchitect

SystemArchitect

BusinessAnalyst

(Modeler)

Topics Atlanta2012

Development

Solution Viewpoints3. Build Platforms

Code

Container

Code

Container

Connector

Platform

Platform

Data

Container

Platform

Connector

Developer

BusinessApplication

Owner


SystemArchitect

BusinessAnalyst

(Modeler)

PlatformEngineer

Topics Atlanta2012

Development Test

Solution Viewpoints4. Build Test Environment

Code

Container

Code

Container

Connector

Platform

Platform

Data

Container

Platform

Connector

Code

Container

Code

Container

Connector

Platform

Platform

Data

Container

Platform

Connector

Developer

BusinessApplication

Owner


SystemArchitect

PlatformEngineer

TesterDevelopmentManager

BusinessAnalyst

(Modeler)

Topics Atlanta2012

Development Test Production

Solution Viewpoints5. Build Production Environment

Code

Container

Code

Container

Connector

Platform

Platform

Data

Container

Platform

Connector

Code

Container

Code

Container

Connector

Platform

Platform

Data

Container

Platform

Connector

Code

Container

Code

Container

Connector

Platform

Platform

Data

Container

Platform

Connector

Operator

Call Center

Security

AuditDeveloper


SystemArchitect

PlatformEngineer

BusinessAnalyst

(Modeler)

TesterDevelopmentManager

BusinessApplication

Owner

ProductionControl

Users

Topics Atlanta2012

Solution Viewpoints

• Users - The Business• Business Process Owner /

Application Owner / End User• Finance

• Architects• Patterns / Standards / Connectors

• Developers• Components / Languages / Data /

Data Structures• Engineers - Platform and

Infrastructure Engineers• Container Providers

• Middleware and Operating Systems• Platform Providers

• (Virtual) Servers and (Virtual) Storage• Connector Providers

• (Virtual) Networks and Middleware

• Testers• Functional Test• Usability Test• Acceptance Test• Load Test• Quality Assurance Test

• Operators - Operations• Operators / Help Desk / Automation• Production Control• Problem / Performance

Management• Change / Configuration Management

• Auditors• Logs• Security • Data and privacy protection

Each “viewpoint” defines “OPTIMAL” in their own terms

Topics Atlanta2012

So What is Optimal?

• Balance ALL viewpoints:

• Requirements-based decision-making

• Consensus building “argument”

• Transparent requirements-based tradeoffs

• And decide:

• How to build components

• What containers to use

• What connectors to use

• What platform to use• For each container• For each lifecycle stage

Topics Atlanta2012

Product/Technology Matching Requirements

PlatformTuned

Software

HighMemory

Bandwidth

Threadingand/or

SuperscalarProcessorOff-load

Out ofOrder

Execution

Cache,Interconnect

& MemoryModel

DeploymentModel

VirtualizationEfficiency

ProcessingCharacteristics

PlatformTuned

Software

HighMemory

Bandwidth

Threadingand/or

SuperscalarProcessorOff-load

Out ofOrder

Execution

Cache,Interconnect

& MemoryModel

DeploymentModel

VirtualizationEfficiency

WorkloadCharacteristics

Productprocessing characteristics

Workloadprocessing characteristics

Match the “job” with the “tool”

Topics Atlanta2012


• IBM Design Centers• Proven Track Record

• Structured Requirements Analysis• aka Structured Argument

1. Define Requirements• coming from all viewpoints

2. Prioritize Requirements3. Assess Each Solution Option’s Ability to Meet

Requirements

• Create a Requirements Analysis Scorecard

Rank Requirements List Weight Score Result Score Result1 Performance 6 L.Meet 24 L.Exceed 302 Scalability 5 L.Meet 20 L.Exceed 253 Integration with existing customer management system 4 L.Meet 16 D.Meet 204 Integration with existing smart meter readings database 4 L.Meet 16 D.Meet 205 Availability 4 Marginal 8 D.Meet 206 Data privacy 3 L.Meet 12 D.Meet 157 Manageability 3 L.Meet 12 D.Meet 158 Development lifecycle support 3 D.Meet 15 L.Meet 12

123 157

Option 1 (x86) Option 2 (z)

Fit for Purpose

Topics Atlanta2012

End of Section

Topics Atlanta2012

Cost Analysis

Topics Atlanta2012

Cost Analysis

TCO Analysis


Optimized Project

Capacity Plan

Configurations

Costs

Topics Atlanta2012

Cost Analysis“Total Cost of Ownership”

Build Operate Maintain Retire

Dev

Test

QA

Prod

HA

DR

Application

Data

Integration

TCO

Lifecycle

Stages

Tiers

Categories

Storage

Connectivity

Energy

Floorspace

Software

Presentation

Servers

Facilities

Sys.Admin

Net.Admin

Migration

Downtime

Topics Atlanta2012

Costs

• Building Costs• The cost of building (or buying) & implementing components• The cost of building (or buying) & implementing containers• The cost of building (or buying) & implementing connectors• The cost of building (or buying) & implementing platforms

• Operating Costs• The cost of operating components, containers, connectors, and platforms• Including managing, monitoring, energizing, cleaning, and replenishing

consumables • Maintaining Costs

• The cost of changing components, containers, connectors, and platforms• Including building changes, testing changes, and implementing changes

Topics Atlanta2012

Cost Analysis - Prerequisites

• Prereq 1 – Technical Equity• Each option being analyzed must be sized and configured to

meet the same set of requirements

• Prereq 2 – Solution Lifecycle Equity• Each option being analyzed must similarly meet the solution’s

lifecycle stages and timetable

• Prereq 3 – Financial Equity• Each option being analyzed must receive similar financial

analysis treatment

Topics Atlanta2012

Cost Analysis – Tools

• IBM TCO Modeling Tools• RACEv for distributed server (including Linux) costing• RACEzOS for z/OS hosted workloads

• Use RACEv and RACEzOS together to model “hybrid solutions”• aka Multi-Tier Multi-Platform configurations

• e.g. zEnterprise Heterogeneous Computing

• Create a TCO Scorecard

RACE EagleScorpion

Topics Atlanta2012

IT Optimization Assessment MethodologyPutting it All Together



Project Plans

TCO Analysis

Architectural Options / Artifacts

Requirements Scorecard

TCO Scorecard

Requirements

Local Factors

Products

Technology

Code/Data

Containers

Connectors

Platforms

Capacity Plan

Configurations

Costs

Topics Atlanta2012

End of Section

Topics Atlanta2012

Case Study

Topics Atlanta2012

The New Business Service(New Smart Meter Customer Application)

• Industry: Electric Utility• Smart Grid adopter (Smart Meter provider)• Collecting customer meter data on 15 min intervals

• New customer service• Home energy usage alerts• When energy usage “over budget”, owner gets notified• When energy usage “off pattern”, owner gets notified• Security use case: “Away From Home”

• If “away”, and if energy usage pattern is amiss• Then owner (and optionally additional parties) get notified

• Web 2.0 UI (lite-browser)

Topics Atlanta2012

Business Requirements

• Function: Home and Away-from-home energy-usage alerts• Time Line: Production offering coincident with stockholders meeting• Available to all home owners equipped with smart meters

• From any browser and/or from downloaded mobile app• Large (growing) number of users – solution scalability required

• 7x24x365 Uptime• High availability runtime with DR (RTO=30min RPO=5min)

• Homeowner userid / pin (customer profile) access control• Assured data privacy high priority

• Integration with existing customer management system• z/OS – Sysplex – CICSplex – CICS TS - Web Services (or EXCI)

• Integration with existing smart meter readings database• z/OS – Sysplex – DB2 for z/OS – Remote SQL (jdbc or similar)

Topics Atlanta2012

End of Section

Topics Atlanta2012

Case Study – Architectural Analysis

Topics Atlanta2012

New Systems

Existing Systems

Application Architecture

HTML

Apache

Java&JSPs

WAS-ND

Connector

Platform

Platform

PatternTables

DB2

Platform

Connector

CustomerSys

COBOL

CICS

ReadingsTables

DB2

Platformz/OSConnector

Connector

DEV

TEST

PROD

Topics Atlanta2012

New Systems

Existing Systems

Option 1 (x86)

HTML

Apache

Java&JSPs

WAS-ND

Network Connector

Platformx86VMwareVirt.Mach.Windows


PatternTables

DB2


CustomerSys

COBOL

CICS

ReadingsTables

DB2

Platformz/OS

DEV

TEST

PROD

Network Connector

Network Connector

Network Connector

Topics Atlanta2012

New Systems

Existing Systems

Option 2 (z)

HTML

Apache

Java&JSPs

WAS-ND

IEDN Connector

PlatformP7PowerVMLPARAIX

PatternTables

PC Connector

CustomerSys

COBOL

CICS

ReadingsTables

DB2

Platformz/OSPC Connector

DEV

TEST

PROD

PlatformIDAA Pattern

Mart

Topics Atlanta2012

Options 3 4 5 6 7 8 and …

• There are certainly many more options• z/VM zLinux• POWER PowerVM AIX• zBX POWER AIX• zEnterprise z/VM zLinux• etc.

• In a “real” Fit for Purpose effort, all viable options would be examined … but care need be taken not to “boil the ocean”

• But for this talk (for this case study) we will keep things simple• And just look at Options 1 and 2

Topics Atlanta2012

End of Section

Topics Atlanta2012

Case Study – Requirements Analysis

Topics Atlanta2012

Requirements Analysis – Step 1

• Focus on requirements• Respect for viewpoints• Seek consensus

• When consensus not reached• Understanding differences and distances• Sensitivity analysis (do differences matter?)

• Step 1 - List the requirements

Topics Atlanta2012

Requirements List

Requirements ListData privacyScalabilityIntegration with existing customer management systemDevelopment lifecycle supportAvailabilityPerformanceManageabilityIntegration with existing smart meter readings database

Topics Atlanta2012

Sort and Weight the Requirements

• Step 2• Prioritize (i.e. sort) the requirements in the list• Assign a weight to each requirement

• To indicate relative importance of each requirement

Rank Requirements List Weight1 Performance 62 Scalability 53 Integration with existing customer management system 44 Integration with existing smart meter readings database 45 Availability 46 Data privacy 37 Manageability 38 Development lifecycle support 3

Topics Atlanta2012

Score the Options

Rank Requirements List Weight Score Score1 Performance 6 L.Meet L.Exceed2 Scalability 5 L.Meet L.Exceed3 Integration with existing customer management system 4 L.Meet D.Meet4 Integration with existing smart meter readings database 4 L.Meet D.Meet5 Availability 4 Marginal D.Meet6 Data privacy 3 L.Meet D.Meet7 Manageability 3 L.Meet D.Meet8 Development lifecycle support 3 D.Meet L.Meet


Qualifier Label ScoreDemonstrated Can Exceed D.Exceed 7

Likely to Exceed L.Exceed 6Demonstrated Can Meet D.Meet 5

Likely to Meet L.Meet 4Marginal Marginal 2

Does Not Meet No.Meet 0

• Step 3 – for each requirement, score the options• Assess each options ability to meet the requirement

Topics Atlanta2012

Rate the Options

• Step 4• Multiply the requirement’s weight by the option’s score• Add up the results


123 157


This is a “Requirements Scorecard”

Topics Atlanta2012

End of Section

Topics Atlanta2012

Case Study – Cost Analysis

Topics Atlanta2012

Step 1 – RACEv Subject Servers

• The set of discrete x86 servers• Presentation – Prod/Test/Dev• Application – Prod/Test/Dev• Database – Prod/Test/Dev

New Systems

Existing Systems

HTML

Apache

Java&JSPs

WAS-ND

Connector

Platform

Platform

PatternTables

DB2

Platform

Connector

CustomerSys

COBOL

CICS

ReadingsTables

DB2

Platformz/OSConnector

Connector

DEV

TEST

PROD

Topics Atlanta2012

Step 2 – RACEv x86 Server Target

• The set of x86 VMware virtual server hosting blade servers• Presentation – Prod/Test/Dev• Application – Prod/Test/Dev• Database – Prod/Test/Dev

New Systems

Existing Systems

HTML

Apache

Java&JSPs

WAS-ND

Network Connector



PatternTables

DB2


CustomerSys

COBOL

CICS

ReadingsTables

DB2

Platformz/OS

DEV

TEST

PROD

Network Connector

Network Connector

Network Connector

Topics Atlanta2012

Step 3 – RACEv zEnterprise TargetDistributed Elements

• The set of distributed elements in the zEnterprise solution• Presentation – Prod/Dev/Test

• PS701s in the zBX

• Database – Prod/Dev/Test• ISAO blades in the zBX

New Systems

Existing Systems

HTML

Apache

Java&JSPs

WAS-ND

IEDN Connector


PatternTables

PC Connector

CustomerSys

COBOL

CICS

ReadingsTables

DB2


DEV

TEST

PROD


Mart

Topics Atlanta2012

Step 4 – RACEzOS zEnterprise Elements

• The z/OS Elements of the solution• Application Servers• WAS for z/OS• PROD LPAR• TEST/DEV LPAR

• WAS/DB2 co-location• zAAP on zIIP engines

New Systems

Existing Systems

HTML

Apache

Java&JSPs

WAS-ND

IEDN Connector


PatternTables

PC Connector

CustomerSys

COBOL

CICS

ReadingsTables

DB2


DEV

TEST

PROD


Mart

Topics Atlanta2012

z196

Topics Atlanta2012

Step 6 – Complete the ModelsExamine the Results

Topics Atlanta2012

Step 7 – Examine More Results

Topics Atlanta2012

Step 8 - Iterate

• Refine Inputs• Add Additional Cases and Solution Configurations• Sensitivity Analysis

• Assumptions Analysis• The cost & value of zEnterprise Unified Resource Manager• The value of co-location• The cross-server sizing • Discounting• Admin ratios• etc.• etc.• etc.

In other words….

Have a productive argument! …

Which is what ALL of this is ALL

about!!!

Topics Atlanta2012

And Finally

• Merge the Requirements Analysis…• And the TCO Analysis


123 157


And make an

“optimal”decision!

Topics Atlanta2012

End of Section

Topics Atlanta2012

Conclusion

Topics Atlanta2012

Sta

rt IT OptimizationScorecard

IBM IT Optimization Analysis

IntegrationArchitecture Workshop

Local Patterns

Other Patterns

Fit for Purpose Workshop

Requirements

Platform OptionsRequirements

Scorecard

Local Costing

TCO Workshop (RACE/Eagle/Scorpion)

TCOScorecard

zEnterprise Whiteboard Right

Fit Workshop

Technology Exploration

Issues Exploration

Topics Atlanta2012

End of Section

Topics Atlanta2012

Questions?

Comments?

Critiques?

Requests??!?!!

Monte Bauman

IBM Columbus

[email protected]

ThankYou

Multi-Platform-Inclusive IT Optimization Assessment ...€¦ · Multi-Platform-Inclusive IT...

Documents

Transcript of Multi-Platform-Inclusive IT Optimization Assessment ...€¦ · Multi-Platform-Inclusive IT...